The Media Project is a network of mainstream journalists who are Christians pursuing accurate and intellectually honest reporting on all aspects of culture, particularly the role of religion in public life in all corners of the world. It welcomes friends from other faiths to such discussions and training.

Dec 9

Dec 9 Got news? New “climate” for God & science

In this year of anniversaries and celebrations, dead scientists like
Darwin and Galileo are getting their due. Live ones, like the atheist
former Oxford don Richard Dawkins, attract media attention pretty much
every time he opens his mouth or slings a godforsaken poster on a bus.

But what of the scientists with strong Christian faith currently building bridges, quietly or outspokenly, between the religious and scientific community? We don’t hear much about them, do we?

These men (interesting that reporters don’t seem to dig for faithful
women scientists) are the subject of a lengthy and well-written article
in a recent Harvard Divinity Bulletin. There are few hiccups here, but they seem minor when one thinks that the topic is so undercovered. The reporter starts off in England, exploring the paradox of lively and overt faith in an unlikely place-among scientists.

Riding the train down to London last summer, after a
two-week fellowship session on science and religion at the University
of Cambridge, I noticed an article in the Independent newspaper about a
new book which reinforced that notion of an increasingly irreligious
Europe. It is true that outward signs of faith—apart from biblical
passages emblazoned on London’s famed red double-decker buses by
jesussaid.org—are difficult to come by.

But I found deeply felt Christianity alive and well in an unlikely setting: the academy’s scientific community.

The writer goes on to talk about some of the Christian heavy hitters
in the fields of cosmology, biology and physics who describe themselves
as “evangelicals.” But they are, asserts the author “evangelicals of a
particular sort.”

This is typically dangerous territory. Evangelicals in England are
often a different sort from American evangelicals. And the writer
doesn’t describe what “sort” they are. He compares them (favorably, one
assumes) with the “apocalyptic American evangelical tribes of arrogant
dominionists or fanciful premillienal dispensationalists of the ‘Left
Behind’ stripe.”

Ok, so now we know what they aren’t—and what they reject, like creationism and intelligent design.

But focus of the article is on a hot topic among faithful
scientists-climate change. The writer does a lovely job of weaving
wonderful quotes from scientists about how their faith does or does not
affect their work with examining the impact that their research is
having on the debate itself.

There is definitely more than one side to this controversy among
conservative Christians. The writer comments that there scientists who
believe that there is no such animal as global warming, or that it
doesn’t matter because the world might end soon, anyhow. But this view
is being debated both in England and in the United States, says the
author.

Yet increasingly, the fundamentalist view of climate
change is losing force and is being challenged by other scientists who
are equally devout in their evangelical beliefs. At Cambridge the
renowned reproductive biologist and ethicist Sir Brian Heap, a
self-described “open-minded evangelical,” is a leading advocate of
addressing climate change. He said he had no difficulty reconciling his
personal faith and scientific discovery and advocacy. “When doing my
own bench research, it was clear that personal faith influenced
decisions about the wisdom of carrying out certain experimentation.” He
continued, “The religious foundation comes from the Christian
motivation to seek the best for others…for the world we too easily
damage.”

I’m not crazy about the use of the word fundamentalist, which becomes an easy tar to brush people who don’t agree with you.

I also wish the author had covered possible interfaces between
Christian scientists and activist “green” evangelicals here and in the
U.K. He alludes to a relationship between Sir John Houghton and
megachurch pastor Joel Hunter, but documenting more such cooperation
would make the story even stronger. There’s a political dimension here
(the struggle among evangelicals) that definitely needs more coverage.
(While we’re on that subject, the topic of what exactly happened to
Richard Cizik, formerly of the National Association of Evangelicals is
a third rail that he probably would have been advised to stay way
from—it weren’t just a fundamentalist revolt.)

I love the quote at the end—it reminds me of the 17th century
laments of poets and theologians like John Donne, who saw the two
disciplines beginning to separate themselves from each other.

Many believe that ideally science and religion should be
inseparable. As Houghton put it, “We are integrated people. Theology
was once called the ‘Queen of the sciences.’”

With its flaws, this is still a good beginning. It is news not only
that well-known British scientists see no impediment to being believers
and researchers both, but that so many are willing to speak out about
what has traditionally been considered a deeply private subject. They
are British, you know. They’ve got to be feeling pretty passionate
about the subject.

Maybe the climate really is changing.

Hat tip: Rod Dreher.

Picture of the Mathematicians Bridge at Cambridge University is from Wikimedia Commons